From: "Carol Spooner" <wildrose at pon.net> To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:;> Subject: UPDATE - Committee to Remove the Pacifica Board Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:59:55 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Dear All --
Many people have emailed to ask me my thoughts about the Pacifica National Board meeting last weekend. Due to a death in the family I was away from home all week and this is my first opportunity to respond.
On November 17th the Pacifica Board of Directors, with 9 out of 15 directors present and voting, adopted a resolution that all the directors would submit their resignations & the board would be reconstituted by 5 members chosen by the board majority, 5 members chosen by the board "dissidents", and 5 members chosen by the 5 local station advisory boards ("LABs"). This would be called a "transition board" and would require a 2/3rds majority vote to take any "major" actions. ("Major" was not defined.) The "transition board" would be required to hold elections of new LABs by the listener-sponsors in each station area on a timetable to be determined, and to address issues concerning the station managers, the fired & banned staff at WBAI, Democracy Now!, the Pacifica Network News stringers' strike.
My thoughts are that it is very uncertain at this point whether the PNB "resolution" will be ratified by the board members who were not there. The board does not have the legal authority to compel the resignations of those who don't agree. If the resolution does take effect, there are numerous problems with it. Much remains to be seen. The lawsuits, however, are NOT settled by this board resolution -- and numerous legal and financial issues are still outstanding. We cannot rely upon a board "resolution" -- we must have legally binding court orders, not just promises, to democratize and return Pacifica to its mission at all five stations. There are serious issues at all 5 Pacifica stations -- serious financial issues, serious management issues, serious issues of programming, serious personnel issues, serious issues of governance structure -- I am particularly displeased with a board that requires a 2/3rds majority vote in order to resolve any of these issues.
We are pressing forward with our aggressive deposition schedule & preparing for trial in January. We also filed a motion for contempt this week against the board majority defendants due to their failure to post the court ordered bond to cover their attorneys' fees that have been advanced by Pacifica.
Your continued financial support is needed and appreciated -- see below for information how to support the listeners' lawsuit.
Pacifica Means Peace. Thanks,
Carol Spooner Committee to Remove the Pacifica Board (sponsoring the "listeners' lawsuit") web page: http://home.pon.net/wildrose/remove.htm
Important -- We can't do this without you! There are 2 ways to give to our listeners' lawsuit legal fund -- tax-deductible & non-tax deductible. If you don't itemize your taxes or don't need the deduction, please choose the non-tax deductible option in order to save us a small administrative overhead fee. Thanks!
Non-tax-deductible gifts to legal fund can be made payable and mailed to:
Committee to Remove the Pacifica Board 1136 Wild Rose Drive Santa Rosa, CA 95401. or on-line through Paypal go to http://www.paypal.com/. You will need to give them our email address: wildrose at pon.net.
Or ... Tax deductible gifts in any amount can be made payable and mailed to:
Marin Health Fund/Public Media Initiative (you can abbreviate: "MHF/PMI") P.O. Box 5402 Mill Valley, CA 94942.
You will receive tax deduction receipt from them. Also, the MHF/Public Media Initiative has a special account to receive gifts of stock in support of our lawsuit. For details contact Linda Remy at mhf1982 at pacbell.net Web Page: www.marinhealthfund.org Thank you!
### This bulletin comes from the Committee to Remove the Pacifica Board web page: http://home.pon.net/wildrose/remove.htm
to subscribe/unsubscribe email wildrose at pon.net
At 05:53 AM 11/26/2001, you wrote:
>From: "Lyn Gerry" <redlyn at loop.com>
>To: savewbai at lists.tao.ca, freepac at recordist.com
>Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 06:39:59 -0500
>
>This article is from the pubcasting trade magazine Current based in
>Washington, DC. Current has covered the Pacifica struggle in an
>even-handed way since 1996.
>
>Lyn
>
>-------------------
>
>http://www.current.org/
>
>Pacifica board votes to disband and create new board to settle lawsuits
>
> The board of the Pacifica Foundation has approved a plan to disband and
>create a new interim board with reps from Local Advisory Boards (LABs) at
>each of the network's five radio stations. Board members drafted and approved
>the plan at a meeting in Arlington, Va., Nov. 16-18, after several announced
>they would not approve a settlement of four lawsuits against the network. The
>LAB representation is a significant nod to the activists who have paralyzed
>Pacifica with boycotts, protests and legal action. The board is now working
>on putting the proposal into effect. If created, the interim board will be
>empowered to address a laundry list of pressing problems. Among other
>actions, the board might resume feeds of flagship morning show Democracy Now!
>and lift a system-wide "gag rule" barring on-air discussion of internal
>matters. The board doubtless also was feeling pressure from Pacifica's
>miserable financial outlook: a reported $300,000 in cash, dwarfed by more
>than $2 million in outstanding bills. For a full report, see our Dec. 3
>issue.
>
>Pacifica nears but doesn't seal settlement
>Originally published in Current, Nov. 19, 2001
>By Mike Janssen
>
>Expectations of a speedy settlement of four lawsuits filed against Pacifica
>faded this month when talks hit a snag over details of a transition to an
>interim board, according to a plaintiff. As Current went to press Friday, the
>left-wing radio network and its further-to-the-left legal opponents had not
>agreed on how to end the protracted fight over control of the network.
>
>One litigant expected talks to end by Friday, when Pacifica's board members
>were scheduled to meet in Washington, D.C. "If there is going to be a
>settlement, everyone is interested in trying to make that happen [by the
>meeting] so that a transition to a new interim board could be done over the
>weekend," said board member Leslie Cagan, who has sued some of her fellow
>board members.
>
>Cagan and other plaintiffs are suing to dismantle Pacifica's board and
>reinstate representatives from the Local Advisory Boards (LABs) at Pacifica's
>five stations. Two years ago Pacifica's board made itself self-selecting,
>ending the practice of letting LABs appoint some members.
>
>That decision fueled protests by Pacifica volunteers and politically minded
>listeners already disturbed by programming changes in the national
>management's push to gain listeners. Firings and resignations of employees
>and volunteers followed, along with picketing of board members and the
>removal from the air of Democracy Now!, Pacifica's flagship morning show.
>Today, Pacifica's critics say the lack of listener representatives on the
>board goes against the network's historic commitment to democratic ideals.
>During past crises such as the anticommunist crusades of the 1950s, the
>Vietnam War and the Iran-Contra scandal, Pacifica gained widespread attention
>for risky, forthright programming. But with many affiliate stations dropping
>its afternoon news program and with Democracy Now! off the air, the network
>has been less able to make waves with coverage of the terrorism crisis.
>
>So there was cause for optimism and even celebration when plaintiffs and
>defendants emerged from 12 hours of mediation Nov. 1 forecasting a
>settlement. Pacifica Board Chairman Robert Farrell called the mediation a
>"stunning success" and expected a final agreement within a week. He said the
>agreement would establish an interim board "to chart Pacifica's future," and
>would include LAB representatives, which would be a landmark bow to network
>critics.
>
>On Nov. 4, plaintiffs and about 80 sympathizers gathered outside KPFA,
>Pacifica's Berkeley station, celebrating the turn of events with snacks,
>drinks and a live deejay.
>But the following week ended without a settlement, and lawyers dismissed
>their mediator, retired California Supreme Court Justice Edward A. Panelli.
>
>Accounts differ over who dismissed the mediator and why, and over whether a
>settlement can be reached. Carol Spooner, who is representing Pacifica liste
>ners in a lawsuit, said Pacifica ended mediation and squelched hope of a
>settlement by refusing to accept "certain terms essential to our goals." She
>said the sticking points centered on Pacifica's desire to maintain control of
>the board.
>
>But Cagan said the decision to end mediation was mutual, and that talks were
>continuing.
>Greg Craig, a lawyer for Pacifica, confirmed that formal mediation had ended
>but added, "Does that end the prospects of settlement? I don't think so. I
>hope not."
>
>Cagan said the road to the predicted speedy settlement was blocked when
>Pacifica's negotiators objected to several points in a draft agreement that
>the plaintiffs' lawyers had prepared. "They really are details that have to
>do with how the actual transition would happen," she said.
>
>Possible details of the transition were circulated in an e-mail by attorney
>Dan Siegel, who is representing LAB members in a suit against the network. A
>copy of the e-mail provided to Current said the interim board of 19 members
>would include:
>
>* six appointed by the plaintiffs;
>
>* eight appointed by the defendants;
>
>* five appointed by LABs, one from each of the five stations.
>
>In the Nov. 5 e-mail, Siegel noted that the settlement had yet to be reduced
>to a final agreement. Cagan said the resulting draft was revised Nov. 9 and
>is still in play.
>
>The board Siegel described could create a majority held by members who
>sympathize with the principles of greater local representation and
>politically progressive programming that have been at stake during the fight.
>
>Before talks hit a snag, pro-reform activists were chiming in with the
>hopeful mood. The Pacifica Campaign, a national movement seeking to unseat
>Pacifica's board, issued a statement saying its members were "elated" by the
>news.
>
>"In the end, the combination of the massive listener boycott and direct
>action campaign against the corporate clique on the Pacifica board (most of
>whom have now resigned) and the relentless fight of the litigants in the
>courts was too great a force to withstand," the Campaign said.
>
>Yet the fight against Pacifica moved ahead on several fronts, even as
>attorneys exchanged phone calls over a settlement. On the legal front,
>litigants went ahead with 40 depositions. "Only lawsuits can be used to
>resolve these difficulties," Spooner said. "A self-selecting board of
>directors is an evil that has to be corrected." The trial is set for Jan. 7.
>
>Meanwhile, the Pacifica Campaign continued efforts to drive away members of
>Pacifica's board majority. It arranged lodging and transportation for
>activists planning to attend the board meeting and related rallies and
>teach-ins. Protestors also launched rallies against Fannie Mae, which employs
>Pacifica board treasurer Wendell Johns.
>
>The week before the meeting, the Campaign also raised questions about
>Pacifica's finances, releasing a review of Pacifica's fiscal year 1999 and
>2000 tax forms commissioned from New York accounting firm Kimerling,
>Margulies & Wisdom Ltd.
>In a review that accountants admitted was "superficial," they noted
>discrepancies on the forms and asked about several other entries, including:
>
>* more than $1.5 million in expenses listed as "miscellaneous" without a
>breakdown, which they called "unacceptable" and "not generally accepted
>accounting principles";
>
>* more than $600,000 held in a non-interest bearing bank account; and
>
>* "self-dealing," which they defined as "when there are any personal
>benefits received by an individual or closely related organization which is
>also an officer, a director or a major donor other than reasonable and
>commensurate compensation paid for services rendered."
>
>"If, indeed, there is a close relationship between an officer or director and
>one of the law firms listed . . . or anyone else, this would be cause for
>further inquiry," the accountants wrote.
>
>Board member John Murdock works for the law firm Epstein, Becker & Green,
>which used to represent Pacifica.
>
>Farrell declined to comment on the report, but said it would be referred to
>the board's treasurer and finance committee as public comment.
>
>Bulletin, Nov. 20, 2001
>Pacifica Board okays pact to end lawsuits, heal rifts
>
>The board of the Pacifica Foundation has approved a plan to disband and
>create a new interim board with representatives from Local Advisory Boards
>(LABs), based at each of the network's five radio stations. The inclusion of
>LAB members is a significant nod to the activists who have paralyzed Pacifica
>with boycotts, protests and legal action. The board is now working on putting
>the proposal into effect.
>
>If created, the interim board will be empowered to address a laundry list of
>pressing problems. Among other actions, the board might resume feeds of
>flagship morning show Democracy Now! and lift a system-wide "gag rule"
>barring on-air discussion of internal matters.
>
>Board members drafted and approved the plan at a meeting in Arlington, Va.,
>Nov. 16-18, after several announced they would not approve a settlement of
>four lawsuits against the network. The board was also pressured by Pacifica's
>miserable financial outlook: a reported $300,000 in cash, dwarfed by more
>than $2 million in outstanding bills.
>
>For a full report, see our Dec. 3 issue.